DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the block pertaining elements (202, 206, 210, and 214) shown in Figure 2; (402, 406, 408, 411, 412, 416, 420, 424, 428, and 432) shown in Figure 4, and (602, 606, 608, 612, 616, 620, 622, 624, and 628) shown in Figure 6 need to have descriptive labels in conformance with 37 CFR 1.84(n), 1.84(o), and/or 1.84(p). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant is requested to update the related U.S. application numbers stated in paragraph [0001].
Paragraph [0052], line 5, “a SATCOM link” should be “a satellite communication (SATCOM) link”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
1. (Proposed Amendment) A centralized security system (CSS) comprising:
one or more processors; and
a computer-readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the CSS to:
receive a plurality of heartbeat messages at a predetermined time interval, wherein the heartbeat messages are transmitted from an incumbent user of a citizens broadband radio service (CBRS) system through a secure connection, the CBRS system comprises a plurality of citizens broadband service devices (CBSDs) located in a neighborhood proximate to a dynamic protection area (DPA), the DPA comprises a plurality of DPA tiles, each one of the heartbeat messages is time stamped and includes DPA data and radar activity data, the DPA data indicates the DPA tile in which the incumbent user is located, and the radar activity data indicates a radio channel on which an onboard radar of the incumbent user transmits radar signals;
identify a region in the neighborhood, based on a predetermined mapping rule specifying a correlation between the region and the DPA tile;
determine one or more CBSDs in the region and authorized to operate on the radio channel indicated in the heartbeat message;
generate a move list, the move list indicating the one or more CBSDs; and
transmit the move list to a spectrum access system (SAS) and instruct the SAS to cause the one or more CBSDs to prevent interference with the incumbent user on the radio channel according to the move list.
2. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 1, wherein the secure connection is a satellite communication (SATCOM) link.
5. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 1, wherein the radar activity data further indicates a current operating status of the onboard radar, a transmission power, a transmission frequency, a pulse repetition frequency, and a pulse width of the radar signals.
6. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 5, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors further cause the CSS to: determine that a total transmission power of each one of the one or more CBSDs on the radio channel exceeds a predetermined threshold, based on the radar activity data.
7. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 5, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors further cause the CSS to: determine that an aggregate interference power spectral density of each one of the one or more CBSDs on the radio channel exceeds a predetermined threshold, based on the radar activity data.
8. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 1, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors further cause the CSS to: instruct the SAS terminates transmission of signals on the radio channel by secondary users associated with the one or more CBSDs.
9. (Proposed Amendment) The CSS of claim 1, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors further cause the CSS to: instruct the SAS to reject a request for transmission of signals on the radio channel by a secondary user associated with the one or more CBSDs.
11. (Proposed Amendment) A method for preventing interference with an incumbent user associated with a citizens broadband radio service (CBRS) system comprising a plurality of CBSDs located in a neighborhood proximate to a dynamic protection area (DPA) that comprises a plurality of DPA tiles, wherein the method comprises:
detecting, by an onboard sensor of the incumbent user, radar signals transmitted by an onboard radar of the incumbent user;
generating, by the incumbent user, a plurality of heartbeat messages at a predetermined time interval, wherein each one of the heartbeat messages is timestamped and includes DPA data and radar activity data, the DPA data indicates a DPA tile [[of]] in which the incumbent user is located, and the radar activity data indicates a radio channel on which [[an]] the onboard radar of the incumbent user transmits radar signals;
transmitting the plurality of heartbeat messages to a centralized security system (CSS) via a secure connection;
identifying, by the CSS, a region in a neighborhood wherein a plurality of CBSDs of the CBRS system [[are]] is located, based on a predetermined mapping rule specifying a correlation between the region and the DPA tile;
determining, by the CSS, one or more CBSDs in the region and authorized to operate on the radio channel indicated in the heartbeat message; generating, by the CSS, a move list that indicates the one or more CBSDs;
transmitting the move list to a spectrum access system (SAS); and
causing, by [[a]] the SAS, the one or more CBSDs to prevent interference with the incumbent user on the radio channel according to the move list.
12. (Proposed Amendment) The method of claim 11, wherein the secure connection is a satellite communication (SATCOM) link.
15. (Proposed Amendment) The method of claim 11, wherein the radar activity data further indicates a current operating status of the onboard radar, a transmission power, a transmission frequency, a pulse repetition frequency, and a pulse width of the radar signals.
Claims 3, 4, and 10 all depend from claim 1, therefore they are also objected.
Claims 13, 14, and 16-20 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 11, therefore they are also objected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the communication system” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1 is directed to a patent-ineligible abstract idea (organizing data and managing spectrum access) and fails to provide an inventive concept that transforms the idea into a patentable application.
The claim recites a centralized entity (the CSS) instructing a Spectrum Access System (SAS) to prevent Citizens Broadband Service Devices (CBSDs) from interfering with incumbent users (such as military radars) near Dynamic Protection Areas (DPAs).
However, generating and executing “move lists” for incumbent protection within DPAs is already the fundamental, standardized role of the SAS in the Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) ecosystem. Using heartbeats or other messages to dynamically adjust operating parameters is standard. To be patentable, computer-implemented claims must offer a technological improvement, rather than merely automating a business process or using a generic computer to execute mental steps. Receiving a message with location and radar data, identifying a region based on a predetermined rule, and generating a list of restricted devices encompasses nothing more than mental processes or abstract mathematical correlations. The claim elements, such as processors, storage media, and executing instructions are generic computing components. The “predetermined mapping rule” and “move list” are executed on standard equipment without defining a novel technical mechanism (such as a fundamentally new algorithmic approach to interference mitigation), it fails to clear the hurdle of § 101.
Regarding claim 11, similar to the apparatus claim 1 discussed above, claim 11 recites a method for coordinating data (radar signals, frequencies, locations) to automate a communication process between sensors and servers. Accordingly, the claim is subject to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming patent-ineligible subject matter.
The claim primarily involves collecting data (detecting radar), organizing or formatting data (generating heartbeat messages with DPA data and timestamps), sending data, and using human-designed mapping rules (identifying regions based on mapping correlation).
The limitations simply call for using conventional computer components (sensors, central servers/CSS, and SAS databases) to perform the abstract steps at a generic computer level.
The steps of detecting radar, generating heartbeat messages, and generating move lists are implemented using “well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known in the industry” (e.g., standard WINN Forum spectrum sharing protocols).
Using a “predetermined mapping rule” or generalized hardware to perform these functions does not transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible application.
The determination of which CBSDs are in a region based on a “predetermined mapping rule” is an algorithmic or mathematical correlation that can be performed in a human's mind or with pen and paper.
The inclusion of an “onboard sensor,” “CSS,” and “SAS” amounts to no more than insignificant extra-solution activity. These are recited at a high level of generality without detailing how the hardware achieves the result in a novel way.
Generating heartbeat messages, timestamping them, and transmitting them represents the gathering, transmitting, and displaying of data, which the courts have repeatedly held to be patent-ineligible abstract ideas.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, merely changing the communication medium to a satellite (SATCOM) link is a generic, well-known, and conventional method of data transmission rather than an unconventional physical transformation or structural improvement.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, encryption, decryption, and hiding (obfuscating) data are classic examples of managing and manipulating information. They are considered abstract data-handling steps without any structural improvement to the hardware or processor.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, they involve data formatting and designating reference coordinates in a database. It is considered mental or purely informational, failing to provide an inventive concept.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, they simply list additional categories of information to be gathered (e.g., pulse width, status, frequency). “Data gathering” or merely presenting more information adds no inventive physical step.
Regarding claims 6-7 and 16-17, these claims are invalid under § 101 because they boil down to a mathematical algorithm (e.g., calculating aggregate interference) performed on a generic processor. Calculations and mathematical determinations alone are unpatentable abstract ideas.
Regarding claim 8-9 and 18-19. The claims recite instructions that tell a central server to perform an action (instructing a SAS to terminate or reject transmissions) without detailing how the computer/CSS actually achieves this. These are classic “result-oriented” claims. Ineligible subject matter of merely by stating a desirable goal on a computer without defining the specific, transformative algorithmic steps that make the computer function differently.
Regarding claims 10 and 20, they introduce a mathematical or non-functional limitation: DPA tiles (Dynamic Protection Area, common in 3.5 GHz/CBRS spectrum sharing) that have irregular dimensions. Defining a geographic or mathematical region by its physical parameters generally falls under abstract ideas, mathematical formulas, or mental processes. Because the claims only recite what the math or data looks like (not how a specific technical apparatus achieves or utilizes it), it does not add an inventive concept.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hannan et al. (US 2022/0159658 A1) relates to a method 100 in FIG. 1 for determining frequency and power spectral density assignment to secondary users, e.g. general authorized access (GAA) citizens broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) of a shared access system (SAS).
Hannan et al. (US 2022/0272701 A1) relates to techniques for planning frequency spectrum and power allocated to transmission points of a radio network that is controlled by a spectrum access system (SAS) and shares spectrum with incumbents and/or other secondary users (e.g., external radio(s)). Techniques for managing communications between components of the radio network and the SAS, and to allocate frequency spectrum and maximum transmission power to component(s) of the radio network.
LITJENS et al. (US 2022/0303782 A1) relates to an apparatus such as a domain proxy implemented in an edge cloud of a private enterprise network includes a processor configured to aggregate traffic for Citizens Broadband radio Service Devices (CBSDs) in a private enterprise network. The apparatus also includes a transceiver configured to monitor communication with geo-redundant instances of a spectrum access system (SAS) that allocate frequency bands in a shared spectrum to the CBSDs. The processor is configured to instantiate a local SAS in response to the geo-redundant instances of the SAS becoming unavailable. The local SAS is configured to respond to heartbeat messages from the CBSDs. The local SAS is also configured to attempt to establish a connection with an environmental sensing capability (ESC) in response to the geo-redundant SASs becoming unavailable.
Yadav et al. (US 2024/0406943 A1) relates to a method of efficiently assigning frequency channels to one or more citizen broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) of a plurality of CBSDs, the method comprising: receiving CBSD registration information from each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs; transmitting, to a spectrum access system (SAS) and for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs, a registration request including the CBSD registration information; receiving, at the SAS, a registration response, for each CBSD, indicating successful registration of a CBSD; transmitting, to the SAS configured to regulate transmissions of at least one CBSD in frequency spectrum shared with at least one other apparatus, a frequency spectrum inquiry for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs; receiving, from the SAS, a frequency spectrum inquiry response for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs, wherein each frequency spectrum inquiry response includes at least one available frequency channel in which the SAS is configured to permit CBSD transmission; transmitting, to the SAS, a grant request, for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs, for at least one of the at least one available frequency channel identified in the frequency spectrum inquiry response for a CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs on whose behalf a corresponding grant request is transmitted; receiving, from the SAS, a grant request response for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs and which includes (x) authorization to transmit in at least one of the at least one of the at least one available frequency channel and (y) a maximum transmit power level corresponding to each of the at least one of the at least one of the at least one available frequency channel; transmitting, to each baseband component of the plurality of CBSDs, a query for information; receiving, from each baseband component of the plurality of CBSDs, a query response including information including at least one bandwidth at which a baseband component, which sent a corresponding query response, can operate; for each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs and using the at least one bandwidth at which a baseband component, which is part of a corresponding CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs, can operate, selecting at least one of at least one of the at least one of the at least one available frequency channel received in a grant response for the corresponding CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs; transmitting, to the SAS and for each CBSD, a heartbeat request; receiving, from the SAS and for each CBSD, a heartbeat response authorizing CBSD transmission using parameters sent in the corresponding grant request; receiving a status notification from each CBSD of the plurality of CBSDs indicating that a CBSD, which sent a corresponding status notification, is ready to transmit and receive; and transmitting, to each CBSD, an acknowledgement of receipt of a status notification and selected one or more available frequency channels and a corresponding maximum transmit power level.
Narayanan Nair et al. (US 2025/0097717 A1) relates to a method of: establishing, by a Citizens Broadband Radio Service Device (CBSD), a primary backhaul connection path for exchanging messages with a core network, a Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) Domain Proxy and a test server; establishing, by the CBSD, a secondary backhaul connection path for exchanging messages with the core network, the CBRS Domain Proxy and the test server; and determining, by the CBSD, whether to utilize the primary backhaul connection path or the secondary backhaul connection path for communicating with the core network and the CBRS Domain Proxy based on communications with the test server.
Khalid et al. (US 2025/0280462 A1) relates to a first Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) network receives instructions to modify its operations with a dual-SIM, dual-subscription (DSDS) device, e.g., due to the local incumbent activity, instead of modifying CBRS operations for the DSDS device, the DSDS device is proactively handed off to a second (e.g., non-CBRS) network, thereby avoiding a reduction of quality of service to the DSDS device. If and when the local incumbent activity ceases, the original CBRS operations can be automatically restored by handing off from the non-CBRS network back to the CBRS network. In some implementations, these functions are orchestrated by a DSDS Mobile Transfer Entity of the CBRS network.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Young T. Tse whose telephone number is (571)272-3051. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:30am-7pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Young T. Tse/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights